Last year, Barack signed a promise to accept public financing of his general election campaign if his Republican opponent did the same. Now it’s general election time and McCain has accepted public financing. Barack has refused, and some people are understandably pissed—they don’t like Barack going back on his word. But I think Barack made the right choice.
The reason is found within intent. Public financing gives each candidate up to $84 million in taxpayer money in return for forgoing private funds. The point is to severely limit the financial influence of special interests. Does it work? No—like cockroaches and rats, when it’s not the will of the candidate then tainted money finds a way in. Barack has already stated he hasn’t and won’t take money from special interests. Moreover, his campaign is unprecedented both its innovative fund-raising prowess and its grassroots support from small donations (55% less than $500, versus McCain’s 31%). He’s already fulfilling the intent of public financing and then some, refusing money diverted from other government programs in favor of legitimate interest from the American people. Combine that with the most successful fund-raising apparatus in history and refusing public funding is both ethically clear and pragmatically correct—everybody wins except the McCain Campaign.
But doesn’t this mean Barack is untrustworthy? I’d argue that’s a useless absolute. Politics isn’t black and white, it’s a constantly changing tableau where the current reality takes a front-row seat. Barack went far beyond the signature and considered context, intent, and impact—he found the pros outweighed the cons and made the smart decision. He didn’t hide anything—everything happened in plain sight. He realizes, regardless, that he’s gone back on his word; he’s prepared a clear and concise case for doing so and is prepared to defend it against detractors. Barack’s demonstrating exactly the sort of astute logic, judgment, wisdom, and pragmatism the American Presidency is sorely lacking, and for rational people he should come out smelling like a rose.
You wouldn’t be singing the same tune if it was McCain rather than Obama. The fact is he made a promise then went back on it. No excuses. Try and be objective for once, he’s just a politician like everyone else.
If you’re looking for “change” you aren’t going to find it.
This is one of the things I love about conservatives. It’s all black and white, right or wrong, you’re-with-us-or-against-us John Wayne bullshit that keeps them afloat. You can’t go against your word because that makes you a flip-flopper! You can’t change your mind, because that’s a sign of weakness and is unpatriotic! “No excuses!” Why do I love it? Because that same nonsense reasoning resulted in McCain becoming the nominee.
The other thing that’s funny to me is that the crux of the anti-Obama camp is “WHERE IS THE CHANGE?! IT’S ALL WORDS!”
You want change? He’s the first legitimate black presidential candidate (and eventually, president). Considering the sheer amount of racism in this country, that’s impressive. Hell, he won 26% of West Virginia — this is the state that fought for the north in the Civil War not because they were against slavery, but because they just didn’t want to be around black people period. Barack has openly and honestly discussed/addressed everything, and his fundraising is completely novel, balanced, pragmatic, and idealistic all at once. In December 2007, he broke the record for the amount of money a candidate has raised in a single month. He has broken that record every single month since, and all without taking a single dime for lobbyists. That alone is worth more than any of the empty pandering McCain has done. Moreover, Obama has brought out voters who historically have never come out to vote before, he has literally empowered grassroots movements, etc.
You want to see the change? The proof is right fucking in front of you, just open your damn eyes if you really want to know. Mouthing off the same tired ignorant conservative rhetoric is a waste of your and my time (and bits on Ku’s server).
I’ll say it again: the main reason I’m happy with Barack’s decision is because it’s emblematic of his holistic, realistic, rational judgment. Barack’s own fund-raising committee suggests that he’s likely to pull in $200-300 million over the general election season, almost entirely from private citizens and much of it from small donations. Given that, would you cripple your hard-fought, popularly-supported, frankly miraculous campaign and give up one of your most solid advantages for the sake of a non-binding, somewhat frivolous agreement made a year ago with your opponent, when conditions were completely different? Hell no. Hell no. I want the President to always consider the now, all aspects of the current situation and the future ramification of all valid decisions—you want the President that makes the most sense for America’s present and future, not its past. Whenever ethical and legal, I want the President to get the most for America he possibly can. (If there’s any downside to this, it would be that Obama now has to devote much more time than McCain to fund-raising this fall—but, in an Internet-age campaign fought with vicious volleys of information, I think the money advantage is worth it.)
My larger point is that the way Barack has conducted his campaign—by several metrics, the best run, most harmonious, most thorough, most amazing campaign in United States history—is impeccable proof of his Presidential credentials. He has demonstrated an incredible grasp of logistics, strategy, demographics, rhetoric, and judgment in the most real, immediate way possible. For those think that’s no big deal, I’d like to see you run a revolutionary campaign in the world’s third largest country. For fuck’s sake, he just outmaneuvered the Clintons, two of the most brilliant politicians of the last generation. Holy shit, this man can lead.
Put another way, he’s almost everything we could hope for in a politician.
Trying to look at this public financing stance objectively, you have to understand the way the system works - it is severely flawed regardless of whether if you are liberal or conservative because in both cases, money is like water, it will find a breach. The public may not see it but it exists. From McCain’s standpoint, of course he’d favor public financing because not only does this limit Obama from heading into red states, but it still allows the RNC to take in a considerable amount of funding through well-off republican donors who can write up to $70,000 per person easy (i.e. lobbyists and oil tycoons with ties to the white house perhaps knowing every loophole possible - don’t you better fucking deny that). Don’t confuse this with the public contribution cap of $84.1 million either - I’m sure both candidates can get this easy token. The DNC however makes about 1/5 of the amount the RNC does because it’s primary donation base don’t associate with the national committees directly. As Gary mentioned, small time donors make up about 55% of Obama’s campaign. What Obama chooses to do is expose this, and abandon the heavily biased system. I don’t deny the fact that it was haphazard decision to announce he’d match public financing attempts early last year but hell how could he have known about this bullshit going on behind the scenes? He is ‘inexperienced’ as critics claim. This is considered political strategy people, not a life-altering flip-flop environmental concern over offshore drilling. Get your head in the game and understand he’s doing this so that he can move into the red states without worrying about burning all his funds in one fucking commercial. Mc Cain would do the same had he been in his situation and you absolutely cannot deny that. The fact that Obama is going to try to win over some ill-informed redneck in the boonies should worry republicans because they know he’d inevitably succeed. Mc Cain would be forced to follow him into his own red state thereby wasting more time than he’s already wasted during the showdown between Obama and Clinton. So, essentially, you can consider this ‘change’ in terms of exposing the vast flaws that already exist.
Regardless of whether the decision was right or wrong, my point was that followers of Obama are basically sheep. No matter what he does, even if it is going back against his word, you will find an excuse to justify his actions. You follow him blindly as if he is some form of demi-god, bent on bringing the second coming.
You complain about hard core conservatives, but are you any better? Can you honestly say you make independent judgments? I think not. Everybody’s judgement is clouded by emotions, and in this case, your overarching hope for a better leader has become a self-fulfilling prophesy with Obama.
If you step back for a second, devoid of emotion, you will find that beyond the propaganda of ‘hope’ and ‘change’, there is nothing more to his campaign or platform. That is not to say that McCain is a better choice, but from an objective point of view his platform is surely more detailed and known. Just as people blindly followed Bush down a path of destruction, so you too but with a different wolf in sheep’s clothing…
And Kunal, my eyes are wide open, but I still don’t see the change. All I see is a switch in politicians, not a change in America. Maybe you can send me some glasses?
I just listed ways in which he is different from other candidates, past and present. It’s up to you to interpret them however you’d like. Also, claiming that people who support him are his “followers” or are “sheep” is just another silly manipulation that is typical of people who disagree with liberals, especially considering how little you know about us. Quite frankly, this type of nonsense is so commonplace that it has zero effect, so excuse me if I divorce myself from this discussion.
That’s the problem with ad hominem attacks.
You really have to admit, on the basest level, that a black nominee for President of America with a very real chance of winning, a little more than 50 years after the civil rights movement, is about as close to a dictionary definition of change as you can get.
“You wouldn’t be singing the same tune if it was McCain rather than Obama. The fact is he made a promise then went back on it. No excuses. Try and be objective for once, he’s just a politician like everyone else” - Are you implying that you’re the one being objective when you’ve just called us sheep? I was trying to provide a statistical breakdown for each candidates stance on the issue. I’m not denying the fact that politicians flip-flop. Every politician has, they’re flawed and are as human as we are. If we were all to keep our word without considering the change in time and conditions, we’d still be strict constitutionalists releasing those in Guantanamo on the basis of due process. I suppose the past administration has broken that promise haven’t they? Though, when it comes to the justification of each changing judgement, it’s a matter of which actually harms more than the other. In this case, I find that the ‘promise’ broken by Obama to be innocuous compared to the one broken by McCain. Besides, ‘broken promises’, ‘no excuses’, what are we? 4? Being a moderate, I’ve read the works of both candidates and respect them both as men and politicians. They’ve both experienced tremendously different lifestyles and in this regard, I believe the public would benefit more in terms of Obama because of the fact he’s had first hand experience of dealing with the struggling class. McCain, the maverick as he once was, is a military man, influenced by being a POW. He himself has admitted to being inexperienced with economics. How do you let that comment slide? True, he does have a strong stance in foreign policy but that is not what the masses are concerned with at the moment. It’s the fact that there are more faults with the domestic policies McCain supports than there are with the ones endorsed by Obama concerning the economy, environment, health care and education. I do agree people are influenced by their emotions but to claim that they cloud one’s ability to reason in terms of outright policies which directly impact their lives is far-fetched. You yourself are driven by emotion to back McCain, overlooking the fact that your candidate of choice has used these terms of ‘hope’ and ‘change’ repetitively as well. The detailed platform you request is out there, but you have to make an effort before you make the claim.